Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 308-17 - ResidencyatDiscoverySquare.Dickson.CUP#2016-042 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Mark Dickson applied for a Restricted Development Final Plan – Conditional Use Permit #R2016-042CUP to allow for the development of a six-story mixed use building with 143 residential units, 19,785 square feet of commercial space, and underground parking to be known as Residence at Discovery Square. The property occupies most of a block bordered by Fifth Street S.W., to the north, Third Avenue S.W., to the east, Sixth Street S.W., to the south, and Fourth Avenue S.W., to the west; and, WHEREAS, the property is legally described as follows: The property described below will be replatted as Lot 1, Block 1 RESIDENCES AT DISCOVERY SQUARE prior to building construction. Parcel 1 - 506 4th Avenue SW The West 60 feet of the North 35 1/7 feet of Lot 6, and the West 60 feet of the South 1 6/7 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, Original Plat, Olmsted County, Minnesota Parcel 2 - 507 3rd Avenue SW The East 80 feet of the South 1 6/7 feet of Lot Seven (7), and the East 80 feet of the North 37 9/14 feet of Lot Six (6), Block Three (3), Original Plat of the City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota Parcel 3 - 514 4th Avenue SW The West 55 feet of the North 6.43 feet of Lot Three (3) and the West 55 feet of the South 1/2 of Lot Four (4), all in Block Three (3) of the Original Plat of the Town, now City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota Parcel 4 - 509 3rd Avenue SW Lot 5 and the North 1/2 of Lot 4; and the South 12 feet in width of Lot 6, less the East 80 feet of the North 2 1/2 feet of the South 12 feet of Lot 6; all in Block 3; all in Original Plat of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota. Parcel 5 - 519 3rd Avenue SW Lot I, except the West 52 7/12 feet thereof; the East 85 feet of Lot 2; Lot 3 and the South 1/2 of Lot 4, less the West 55 feet thereof; all in Block 3; all in Original Plat of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota. Parcel 6 - 304 5th Street SW The East 83.6 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, Original Plat of the Town now City, of Rochester, Minnesota, except the South 1 6/7 feet of said Lot 7; and, 1 WHEREAS, since the property is zoned R-1 (Mixed Single Family), and since the proposed density of development is not permitted under this zoning designation, the Applicant is proposing the development through the restricted development process; and, WHEREAS, this application requires a two-step review process consisting of a preliminary plan and a final plan. The preliminary plan phase follows the Type III, Phase II procedure with a hearing before the Planning Commission and a hearing before the Council. The final plan phase is a Type III, Phase III procedure with a hearing before the City Council; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.706 states the Council must approve a restricted development final plan if it finds the development satisfies the criteria listed in R.C.O. §62.708, subd. 3 or a modification for any unmet criteria has been granted as provided in R.C.O. §62.712; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.712 states the Council may waive the need to satisfy certain approval criteria if it finds: 1. The applicant has demonstrated that the plan as submitted adequately compensates for failing to address the criterion in question; and, 2. The strict application of any provision would result in exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional and undue hardship upon, the owner of such property, provided the modification may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the purposes of this ordinance or the policies of the Land Use Plan; and, WHEREAS, R.C.O. §62.708 (Criteria for Type III Developments), subd. 3 provides the relevant criteria for the review of this application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Department applied the criteria found at R.C.O. §62.708, subd. 3 (Final Type III Development Plan) to this application and prepared the following findings of fact: A. Public Facility Design: City sewer and water and other utilities are available to serve the site. Stormwater management will be evaluated during the development of the Grading and Stormwater Management Plan. B. Geologic Hazards: There are no known geologic hazards on the site. The site has no known sinkholes and there are no hydric or floodplain soils. th C. Access Effect: Access to the site is proposed from 4 Avenue SW. This is the same access point that was approved through the preliminary restricted development plan. Headlight glare from the 2 parking access driveway was identified during the preliminary review as a possible issue. The final plans show that headlight glare from vehicles exiting the parking are will fall onto a portion of the adjacent building that is unlikely to affect any of the specific uses in that building. D. Pedestrian Circulation: The plans identify proposed sidewalk improvements and proposed access to building entrances placed along the public sidewalk. E. Foundation and Site Plantings: A landscape plan has been prepared for this development showing that boulevard trees will be planted to be consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Additional foundation and right-of-way plantings are proposed throughout the block. This landscaping will be consistent with surrounding development. F. Site Status: The site and building will have one owner. Common space owned and maintained by building owner. G. Screening and Bufferyards: Modified bufferyards are shown in two places on the final site plan. The first location is for thrd boulevard trees along the 5 Street/ 3 Avenue frontages. The total number of required boulevard trees is provided, but one tree thrd was moved from the 5 Street frontage to the 3 Avenue frontage to accommodate the proposed loading area. The second modified bufferyard is along all lot lines separating the proposed development from the three existing residential homes. In these locations where the building setback is 5 feet from the property line, the applicant is proposing to shrubs along with a 10 foot tall garden screen wall to replace the understory and canopy trees that would otherwise be required. The applicant states that the lack of space and sunlight in these areas would be difficult for trees, and that the proposed garden screen would provide healthy vegetation growth with a visual screen in these areas. H. Final Building Design: The building and site layout are consistent with the massing approved through the preliminary restricted development review. With the preliminary review, the applicant provided a shadow study to highlight how the surrounding areas will be affected by shadows from the proposed project. Prior to Council approval of the preliminary plan, the height 3 of the building was reduced in order to address concerns of shadow impacts to existing dwellings adjacent to the project on the west. I. Internal Circulation Areas: Parking proposed within the lower level of the development complies with applicable requirements for design. A loading area is proposed with this final site plan. This loading area is located within the public right-of-way th along 5 Street SW, to the north of the site. This general location is appropriate due to its proximity to the commercial spaces on the first floor. However, according to Section 63.462, loading areas within a public right-of-way shall be acceptable provided the road authority has agreed to designate and post the loading area for such use. J. Ordinance Requirements: The final plan proposal is consistent with appearance standards from either the applicable zoning district standards or the modified standards of the approved preliminary plan. The only exception to this is the landscape buffers described above where landscaping was moved or modified to accommodate other elements of the proposal or to suit a specific condition where the required bufferyard plantings might fail to thrive. K. Non-vehicular and Alternate Travel Modes: The development provides direct pedestrian access to pedestrian entrances from the public sidewalks along surrounding street frontages. Plazas are placed along the street frontages and in front of public pedestrian entrances. Bicycle parking is proposed throughout the development, including locations outside of the building at street level and in the lower-level parking area; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Department’s June 14, 2017, staff report states that the Planning Department staff recommends approval of the Restricted Development Plan – Conditional Use Permit subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to building permit approval, documentation showing that the Rochester Public Works Department will agree to designate and post the loading area shall be submitted the Planning Department. 2. Prior to approval of building permits, the final site plan shall be revised to show the following: 4 A. Sign area labels for commercial tenant business signs shall be revised to state: “total business wall sign area on east and west elevations not to exceed 350 square feet total. Signs must be located within sign area.” B. Existing fire hydrants shall be shown on the utility plan. C. Relocation of the bicycle rack along the Fourth Avenue frontage to a location away from the transformer. D. The slope of the sidewalks to follow the standard of matching the slope of the abutting street. Certain plan sheets C3.0 for example, appear to show the sidewalk slopes not following this standard. E. Positive drainage away from the building. F. Parking management plan narrative shall be revised to reflect changes to the parking layout. 3. The applicant is required to re-plat the property and record the final plat, prior to the issuance of the building permit for the project. 4. The construction plan and profile must meet City Standards for public watermain construction through either the revision of the utility plan (sheet C5.0) and the addition of a profile to meet these standards shall be revised, or the separate submittal of another plan for approval by RPU Water. 5. Prior to construction of public improvements, a City-Owner Contract is required for watermain construction within the public right-of-way. 6. Prior to issuance of the building permit for the project, the applicant will need to coordinate the use types proposed by the live work spaces with the City of Rochester Building Safety Department to confirm conformance with the Minnesota Stage Building Code. 7. The applicant acknowledges that the on and off site public facilities design and operations will require further technical evaluation and the final design shall conform to the requirements for facilities as determined by the City of Rochester Departments of Public Works, Parks/Recreation, and/or Planning Department. 5 8. The parking area will not contain any contract parking for users not associated with the uses in the building. 9. The existing address associated with the site will be retired as the buildings are demolished. The proposed building on the site will need to apply for new addressing which can be coordinate with the Planning Department addressing division during the building permit process. 10. Grading and Drainage Plan approval is required prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project. 11. Execution of a revocable permit agreement is required for any private features proposed within the public ROW or other public easements. 12. The existing driveways that will not be utilized as part of this redevelopment project shall be removed and the areas restored with boulevard and curb & gutter as required by the City of Rochester Public Works Department. 13. Charges/fees applicable to the development of the property include the following: A. Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) B. Water Availability Charge (WAC) C. Plant Investment Fee (PIF) WHEREAS, on June 14, 2017, the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this restricted development final plan, reviewed the application according to the requirements of R.C.O. §62.708, and recommended approval based upon Planning Department staff’s recommended findings of fact subject to the 13 conditions of approval described above; and, WHEREAS, on July 5, 2017, the Common Council held a public hearing on the restricted development final plan request and permitted all interested persons to be heard; and, WHEREAS, the applicant agreed with the recommended 13 conditions of approval; and, th WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance of the evidence submitted at the July 5 public hearing, the Common Council adopts as its own the Planning Commission’s recommended findings of fact and 13 conditions of approval as described above; and, 6 WHEREAS, based upon a preponderance and substantial weight of the evidence th submitted at the July 5 public hearing, the Common Council determines that the Applicant satisfied the criteria of R.C.O. §62.708 subject to the 13 conditions of approval recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Rochester that the Restricted Development Final Plan – Conditional Use Permit #R2016-042CUP requested by Mark Dickson is in all things approved subject to the 13 conditions of approval as stated above. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS __________ DAY OF _______________, 2017. _____________________________________ PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL ATTEST: __________________________ CITY CLERK APPROVED THIS _____ DAY OF ______________________, 2017. ________________________________ MAYOR OF SAID CITY (Seal of the City of Rochester, Minnesota) Zone15\\RestDevFinal.1642 7